On 2/3/06, Jay Converse <supermo0(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 2/3/06, The Cunctator
<cunctator(a)gmail.com> wrote:
More (and automatic) admins, I say.
This is the easiest, fastest, most efficient, least work-intensive
method...
of dismantling Wikipedia from the inside out.
I'd say a good portion of our vandals are kids who have nothing better
to
do. This is the same kind of kid who, from
experience with forums, and
various other free forms of online entertainment, will perform the bare
minimum of actual work necessary to get whatever power, MP3, level they
want.
If you tell people they need to browse 6 months and get 1000 edits and
they
will be automatically admin'd, you will see
people adding content to
articles one word at a time, making meaningless edits to pages over and
over
again, and doing that until they hit 1001, then
sit around until 6
months
have passed up. Then they'll go nuts using
their admin powers in
incredibly
new and damaging ways.
Wow, you have not only a minimum faith in the good nature of your
fellow man, a lot of faith in their lack of anything better to do.
Automatic adminship is NOT the way to go.
Absolutely not. To be
honest, I
don't think we need to be admitting admins at
the rate that we
are. Hell,
RfA pretty much is an automatic approval process
at this point anyway,
and
I've seen infrequent complaints that some
admins getting through aren't
quite stable. Just imagine what would happen if we put adminship in the
hands of, essentially, everyone.
Oh, lordy! The unwashed masses! Quick, defend the citadel. Being an
admin really ain't that amazing.
Except for the simple fact that they can delete images, which cannot be
restored. All it takes is one bad apple to completely destroy Wikipedia's
images, unless they're stopped in time.
And we all know how hard it is to remove an admin once he's there.
--
Jay Converse
I'm not stupid, just selectively ignorant.